Fundraising for 2019/2020: 12 Months Renewed - We are good until October 2020. Paypal Donation Link Here

Immigration Policy

For discussion of religion and politics

Moderators: LawBeefaroni, $iljanus

Post Reply
User avatar
LawBeefaroni
Forum Moderator
Posts: 46933
Joined: Fri Oct 15, 2004 3:08 pm
Location: Urbs in Horto, where we only use the old smilies

Re: Immigration Policy

Post by LawBeefaroni » Tue Mar 05, 2019 10:39 am

Jaymann wrote:
Tue Mar 05, 2019 10:32 am
Texas, it figures. People wonder if there is evil in the world - you need look no further.
Over time, Asif began working as a semi-truck driver for his cousin, and one recent job assignment took him all the way to south Texas.
It's simple. If he hadn't gone to South Texas, none of this would have happened.

Fool me once, shame on you. Enter Texas, shame on me.
" Hey OP, listen to my advice alright." -Tha General
"No scientific discovery is named after its original discoverer." -Stigler's Law of Eponymy, discovered by Robert K. Merton

MYT

User avatar
geezer
Posts: 7329
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 1:52 pm
Location: Yeeha!

Re: Immigration Policy

Post by geezer » Tue Mar 05, 2019 11:10 am

In our defense, the metropolitan areas (well, Houston and Austin) are as progressive as anywhere outside the SF Bay area. It's just that we have a critical mass of ignorant bubbas and religious hypocrites that regularly bring the high-profile stupid upon us :(

User avatar
Jaymann
Posts: 9264
Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2004 7:13 pm
Location: California

Re: Immigration Policy

Post by Jaymann » Tue Mar 05, 2019 12:16 pm

And arguably the only state that would put Ted Cruz into office. There is a reason they chose Dealey Plaza...
Jaymann
]==(:::::::::::::>

User avatar
Isgrimnur
Posts: 62780
Joined: Sun Oct 15, 2006 12:29 am
Location: Chookity pok
Contact:
Isgrimnur’s avatar
Snooze

Re: Immigration Policy

Post by Isgrimnur » Tue Mar 05, 2019 12:19 pm

And then there was the mink coat mob.

User avatar
geezer
Posts: 7329
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 1:52 pm
Location: Yeeha!

Re: Immigration Policy

Post by geezer » Tue Mar 05, 2019 12:51 pm

Jaymann wrote:
Tue Mar 05, 2019 12:16 pm
And arguably the only state that would put Ted Cruz into office. There is a reason they chose Dealey Plaza...
Nah, sadly there's plenty of bumblefuck red states that would elect Cruz, and I'm not sure Texas would actually run a Roy Moore, for example, statewide. Plus as a whole we're trending in the right direction. I mean, we don't even have a bathroom bill on the docket this time around. That's progress, son. ;)

User avatar
Holman
Posts: 21777
Joined: Sun Oct 24, 2004 8:00 pm
Location: Approximately Wissahickon

Re: Immigration Policy

Post by Holman » Wed Mar 06, 2019 9:25 pm


NEW: US officials made list of reporters, lawyers, activists to question at the border, according to documents obtained by @nbcsandiego and interviews with people on the list. https://on.msnbc.com/2ELuTT8
Nothing authoritarian here, nope.
Much prefer my Nazis Nuremberged.

User avatar
Isgrimnur
Posts: 62780
Joined: Sun Oct 15, 2006 12:29 am
Location: Chookity pok
Contact:
Isgrimnur’s avatar
Snooze

Re: Immigration Policy

Post by Isgrimnur » Thu Mar 07, 2019 2:19 am

WaPo
The number of people taken into custody along the Mexico border jumped an additional 31 percent last month as an unprecedented mass migration of families from Central America pushes unauthorized crossings to the highest levels in a decade, according to U.S. Customs and Border Protection figures released Tuesday.

Last month, the shortest of the year, was the busiest February at the border since 2007, officials said, with authorities detaining 76,103 migrants, up from 58,207 in January. The percentage of migrants who arrived as part of a family group also reached a new peak, with 40,325 parents and children taken into custody, a 67 percent leap from the previous month.

“The system is well beyond capacity and remains at a breaking point,” Customs and Border Protection Commissioner Kevin McAleenan, the nation’s top border security official, told reporters Tuesday afternoon.
...
The February statistics are the clearest indication yet that unauthorized migration remains on a sharp upward trajectory after a historic low point in 2017. Department of Homeland Security officials are bracing for an even bigger surge this spring.
...
A backlog of more than 800,000 pending cases in U.S. immigration courts and court-imposed limits on the government’s ability to quickly detain and deport the family groups have become “the most significant factors affecting border security,” McAleenan said.

User avatar
GreenGoo
Posts: 40570
Joined: Thu Oct 14, 2004 10:46 pm
Location: Ottawa, ON

Re: Immigration Policy

Post by GreenGoo » Thu Mar 07, 2019 2:48 am

Isgrimnur wrote:
Thu Mar 07, 2019 2:19 am
Last month, the shortest of the year, was the busiest February at the border since 2007
When comparing a specific February to other Februaries, noting that February is shorter than other months is irrelevant. You could argue that the later comparison to January makes the comment relevant, but then the "shortest month" comment should be in that comparison sentence, not in the February to Februaries comparison sentence.

I hate that shit.

User avatar
Remus West
Posts: 33027
Joined: Mon May 09, 2005 5:39 pm
Location: Not in Westland

Re: Immigration Policy

Post by Remus West » Thu Mar 07, 2019 9:48 am

GreenGoo wrote:
Thu Mar 07, 2019 2:48 am
Isgrimnur wrote:
Thu Mar 07, 2019 2:19 am
Last month, the shortest of the year, was the busiest February at the border since 2007
When comparing a specific February to other Februaries, noting that February is shorter than other months is irrelevant. You could argue that the later comparison to January makes the comment relevant, but then the "shortest month" comment should be in that comparison sentence, not in the February to Februaries comparison sentence.

I hate that shit.
It was one of the shortest Februaries in the last 4 years though.
“As democracy is perfected, the office of president represents, more and more closely, the inner soul of the people. On some great and glorious day the plain folks of the land will reach their heart's desire at last and the White House will be adorned by a downright moron.” - H.L. Mencken

User avatar
Isgrimnur
Posts: 62780
Joined: Sun Oct 15, 2006 12:29 am
Location: Chookity pok
Contact:
Isgrimnur’s avatar
Snooze

Re: Immigration Policy

Post by Isgrimnur » Sat Mar 09, 2019 2:01 am

WaPo
In a legal blow to the Trump administration, a federal judge ruled Friday that all migrant families separated during the government’s border crackdown should be included in a class-action lawsuit. But he stopped short of immediately ordering the Justice Department to track them all down.

U.S. District Judge Dana Sabraw in California said the universe of separated families should extend beyond the 2,700-plus children taken from their parents last spring, and include families forced apart as early as July 1, 2017, and the months afterward, when the Trump administration was denying that it had a policy of separating families.

Sabraw said a government watchdog report in January that potentially thousands more families were separated than the Trump administration had admitted publicly compelled the court to look into the matter.
...
The ruling dramatically expands the scope of the class-action lawsuit that compelled the Trump administration to reunite the separated families and prolongs a political tangle for the president that had been nearing its end.

Sabraw said he would hear arguments later this month to decide whether to require the Trump administration to locate the rest of the families. But he said “the Court has an obligation to resolve that question,” especially for parents who may have been deported without their children, and although it “may be burdensome, it clearly can be done.”

User avatar
Isgrimnur
Posts: 62780
Joined: Sun Oct 15, 2006 12:29 am
Location: Chookity pok
Contact:
Isgrimnur’s avatar
Snooze

Re: Immigration Policy

Post by Isgrimnur » Mon Mar 11, 2019 1:21 pm

Reuters
President Donald Trump on Monday will ask the U.S. Congress for an additional $8.6 billion to help pay for his promised wall on the U.S-Mexico border to combat illegal immigration and drug trafficking, officials familiar with his 2020 budget request told Reuters.
...
Broadly speaking on the budget, Kudlow told Fox, “The president is proposing roughly a 5 percent across-the-board reduction in domestic spending accounts.”

Jeff V
Posts: 31964
Joined: Fri Oct 15, 2004 7:17 pm
Location: Nowhere you want to be.

Re: Immigration Policy

Post by Jeff V » Mon Mar 11, 2019 1:33 pm

Isgrimnur wrote:
Mon Mar 11, 2019 1:21 pm
Reuters
President Donald Trump on Monday will ask the U.S. Congress for an additional $8.6 billion to help pay for his promised wall on the U.S-Mexico border to combat illegal immigration and drug trafficking, officials familiar with his 2020 budget request told Reuters.
...
Broadly speaking on the budget, Kudlow told Fox, “The president is proposing roughly a 5 percent across-the-board reduction in domestic spending accounts.”
So he thinks the problem all along is that he didn't ask for enough in the first place? :grund:

User avatar
GreenGoo
Posts: 40570
Joined: Thu Oct 14, 2004 10:46 pm
Location: Ottawa, ON

Re: Immigration Policy

Post by GreenGoo » Mon Mar 11, 2019 2:33 pm

Ask for more than you need so there is room to negotiate.

Art of the deal.

In all honesty this is a direct challenge and calling out of democrats for continuing the fight. I could almost admire it if he wasn't a douchebag and the wall wasn't such a stupid boondoggle.

User avatar
Grifman
Posts: 18245
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 7:17 pm

Re: Immigration Policy

Post by Grifman » Sun Mar 17, 2019 2:56 pm

This is an excellent article on how Mexican human trafficking gangs are "upgrading" their operations to move people from Central America, primarily Guatemala, to the US:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/national ... 098ea7270d
Instead, recruiters are selling clients in Guatemala on the journey with presentations akin to the benign pitch of a travel agency. They offer a range of price points at different levels of passenger comfort, according to U.S. and Guatemalan officials who spoke on the condition of anonymity to share sensitive details about smuggling networks’ operations.

Customers paying as little as $2,500 are typically made to ride in trucks or stand in cattle cars, while others buying packages for $7,000 or more get premium bus service. Children generally travel free, because those who arrive at the U.S. border with a minor only need to be guided to the edge, not smuggled across it.

The express journey is typically financed by migrants’ relatives already working in the United States or with microloans that leverage homes and property as collateral, in some cases with notarized documents that allow the smuggling organizations to collect unpaid debts. In an especially worrisome sign for U.S. officials, the price of the journey has been dropping in recent months as the rapid bus routes allow smugglers to cut costs and boost volume.

In most cases, upon crossing the border the migrants express a fear of persecution if deported back home, the first step in seeking U.S. asylum. Some arrive with detailed stories of gang threats, violence and police inaction, and documents to back their claims.

But many other Guatemalans appear to be heading north for jobs in a humming U.S. economy that is facing labor shortages. In November, Guatemala became the leading source of unauthorized migration to the United States, surpassing Mexico for the first time.
Let me say that I am against the wall. And I think we ought to treat illegal immigrants humanely and follow the law with respect to the refugee question. But it must be acknowledged that the system and law were not set up to handle an organized effort to collect thousands of refugees and dump them at the border to seek asylum. To me this is an abuse of the process. I'm not sure what the answer is but, while I don't consider the situation at the border an "emergency", it appears to me that the situation as described above it not optimal.
Tolerance is the virtue of the man without convictions. – G.K. Chesterton

User avatar
Jaymann
Posts: 9264
Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2004 7:13 pm
Location: California

Re: Immigration Policy

Post by Jaymann » Sun Mar 17, 2019 3:23 pm

They are getting stopped at the border, so the system is working. Building a wall does not solve this.
Jaymann
]==(:::::::::::::>

User avatar
Grifman
Posts: 18245
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 7:17 pm

Re: Immigration Policy

Post by Grifman » Sun Mar 17, 2019 4:16 pm

Jaymann wrote:
Sun Mar 17, 2019 3:23 pm
They are getting stopped at the border, so the system is working. Building a wall does not solve this.
It's as if you didn't even read what I posted:

1) I said that I did not support building a wall
2) From what the article stated, the system is not working because it is not equipped to handle tens of thousands of family members presenting themselves as refugees at the border
Tolerance is the virtue of the man without convictions. – G.K. Chesterton

User avatar
Jaymann
Posts: 9264
Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2004 7:13 pm
Location: California

Re: Immigration Policy

Post by Jaymann » Sun Mar 17, 2019 5:15 pm

I wasn't accusing you of favoring a wall. My point is probably the best policy is not to freak out, but let them wait in line like everybody else.
Jaymann
]==(:::::::::::::>

User avatar
GreenGoo
Posts: 40570
Joined: Thu Oct 14, 2004 10:46 pm
Location: Ottawa, ON

Re: Immigration Policy

Post by GreenGoo » Sun Mar 17, 2019 5:21 pm

Jaymann wrote:
Sun Mar 17, 2019 5:15 pm
I wasn't accusing you of favoring a wall. My point is probably the best policy is not to freak out, but let them wait in line like everybody else.
The current administration has taken multiple steps to increase the wait, exacerbating the situation. It's clear that the current administration would prefer to decrease the number of people entering the country, illegal or otherwise.

If only there was some way to get additional resources to the border to handle the immigration situation. Some sort of emergency funding, maybe. Someone should ask the president if he is aware of anything that could be done.

User avatar
Zarathud
Posts: 13906
Joined: Fri Oct 15, 2004 10:29 pm
Location: Chicago, Illinois

Re: Immigration Policy

Post by Zarathud » Mon Mar 18, 2019 4:01 am

If only the President could think ahead and use his political skills to convince Mexico and Guatemala to effectively discourage emigration to the US. But Trump can't negotiate his way out of a paper bag, let alone convince states who have an incentive to see Trump fail.
"If the facts don't fit the theory, change the facts." - Albert Einstein
"When the president does it, that means that it is not illegal. - Nixon
"I don't stand by anything." - Trump
“Bad men need nothing more to compass their ends, than that good men should look on and do nothing.” - John Stuart Mill, Inaugural Address Delivered to the University of St Andrews, 2/1/1867

User avatar
Pyperkub
Posts: 19358
Joined: Mon Dec 13, 2004 5:07 pm
Location: NC- that's Northern California
Contact:

Re: Immigration Policy

Post by Pyperkub » Mon Mar 18, 2019 9:19 am

Jaymann wrote:I wasn't accusing you of favoring a wall. My point is probably the best policy is not to freak out, but let them wait in line like everybody else.
Or make e-verify mandatory.
There are three ways to not tell the truth: lies, damned lies, and statistics.

User avatar
Isgrimnur
Posts: 62780
Joined: Sun Oct 15, 2006 12:29 am
Location: Chookity pok
Contact:
Isgrimnur’s avatar
Snooze

Re: Immigration Policy

Post by Isgrimnur » Tue Mar 19, 2019 1:57 pm

Reuters
The Supreme Court on Tuesday endorsed the U.S. government’s authority to detain immigrants awaiting deportation anytime - potentially even years - after they have completed prison terms for criminal convictions, handing President Donald Trump a victory as he pursues hardline immigration policies.

The court ruled 5-4 along ideological lines, with its conservative justices in the majority and its liberal justices dissenting, that federal authorities could pick up such immigrants and place them into indefinite detention anytime, not just immediately after they finish their prison sentences.

The ruling, authored by conservative Justice Samuel Alito, left open the possibility that some individual immigrants could challenge their detention. These immigrants potentially could argue that the use of the 1996 federal law involved in the case, the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act, against them long after finishing their sentences would violate their due process rights under the U.S. Constitution.

The law states the government can detain convicted immigrants “when the alien is released” from criminal detention. Civil rights lawyers argued that the language of the law shows that it applies only immediately after immigrants are released. The Trump administration said the government should have the power to detain such immigrants anytime.

It is not the court’s job, Alito wrote, to impose a time limit for when immigrants can be detained after serving a prison sentence. Alito noted that the court has said in the past that “an official’s crucial duties are better carried out late than never.”

Jeff V
Posts: 31964
Joined: Fri Oct 15, 2004 7:17 pm
Location: Nowhere you want to be.

Re: Immigration Policy

Post by Jeff V » Tue Mar 19, 2019 2:18 pm

GreenGoo wrote:
Sun Mar 17, 2019 5:21 pm
Jaymann wrote:
Sun Mar 17, 2019 5:15 pm
I wasn't accusing you of favoring a wall. My point is probably the best policy is not to freak out, but let them wait in line like everybody else.
The current administration has taken multiple steps to increase the wait, exacerbating the situation. It's clear that the current administration would prefer to decrease the number of people entering the country, illegal or otherwise.

If only there was some way to get additional resources to the border to handle the immigration situation. Some sort of emergency funding, maybe. Someone should ask the president if he is aware of anything that could be done.
We had applied for permanent residency for my mother-in-law. We expected it would take 6 months to a year. Friday, we got the approval letter -- just over 3 months since we applied. Maybe someone didn't get the memo or INS is working behind the scenes to undermine things? Or, most likely, Trump's wishes are illegally targeted and therefore impossible to unilaterally implement without an instant legal challenge.

User avatar
GreenGoo
Posts: 40570
Joined: Thu Oct 14, 2004 10:46 pm
Location: Ottawa, ON

Re: Immigration Policy

Post by GreenGoo » Tue Mar 19, 2019 3:01 pm

I don't understand.

So you're saying there isn't a backlog, with fewer resources for judges and processing than ever before, and it's all just a smokescreen because of your anecdote?

Or there is, but your mom-in-law is special?

What are you saying Jeff? I'm sure it's clear in your head, but I could use some clarification.

User avatar
LawBeefaroni
Forum Moderator
Posts: 46933
Joined: Fri Oct 15, 2004 3:08 pm
Location: Urbs in Horto, where we only use the old smilies

Re: Immigration Policy

Post by LawBeefaroni » Tue Mar 19, 2019 3:18 pm

GreenGoo wrote:
Tue Mar 19, 2019 3:01 pm
I don't understand.

So you're saying there isn't a backlog, with fewer resources for judges and processing than ever before, and it's all just a smokescreen because of your anecdote?

Or there is, but your mom-in-law is special?

What are you saying Jeff? I'm sure it's clear in your head, but I could use some clarification.
It's probably a different ask to get permanent residency for the mother of a naturalized US citizen than to get asylum for someone standing at the border.
" Hey OP, listen to my advice alright." -Tha General
"No scientific discovery is named after its original discoverer." -Stigler's Law of Eponymy, discovered by Robert K. Merton

MYT

User avatar
GreenGoo
Posts: 40570
Joined: Thu Oct 14, 2004 10:46 pm
Location: Ottawa, ON

Re: Immigration Policy

Post by GreenGoo » Tue Mar 19, 2019 3:38 pm

LawBeefaroni wrote:
Tue Mar 19, 2019 3:18 pm
It's probably a different ask to get permanent residency for the mother of a naturalized US citizen than to get asylum for someone standing at the border.
Sure. I have no idea. Is that what Jeff was saying? Was he just making a statement? "My mom-in-law got into the country 3 months sooner the estimated time." Why is he quoting my comment? Is it related in some way?

That's good news, congratulations Jeff. I hope your mom-in-law likes it in the US.

User avatar
LawBeefaroni
Forum Moderator
Posts: 46933
Joined: Fri Oct 15, 2004 3:08 pm
Location: Urbs in Horto, where we only use the old smilies

Re: Immigration Policy

Post by LawBeefaroni » Tue Mar 19, 2019 4:37 pm

GreenGoo wrote:
Tue Mar 19, 2019 3:38 pm
LawBeefaroni wrote:
Tue Mar 19, 2019 3:18 pm
It's probably a different ask to get permanent residency for the mother of a naturalized US citizen than to get asylum for someone standing at the border.
Sure. I have no idea. Is that what Jeff was saying? Was he just making a statement? "My mom-in-law got into the country 3 months sooner the estimated time." Why is he quoting my comment? Is it related in some way?

That's good news, congratulations Jeff. I hope your mom-in-law likes it in the US.
Jeff is just an eternal optimist and he couldn't resist dropping some good news in such a gloomy-gus of a thread.
" Hey OP, listen to my advice alright." -Tha General
"No scientific discovery is named after its original discoverer." -Stigler's Law of Eponymy, discovered by Robert K. Merton

MYT

User avatar
GreenGoo
Posts: 40570
Joined: Thu Oct 14, 2004 10:46 pm
Location: Ottawa, ON

Re: Immigration Policy

Post by GreenGoo » Tue Mar 19, 2019 4:41 pm

Ah.

Well I love good news, and he seemed to direct it specifically to me, which I appreciate.

Good news is always good.

Jeff V
Posts: 31964
Joined: Fri Oct 15, 2004 7:17 pm
Location: Nowhere you want to be.

Re: Immigration Policy

Post by Jeff V » Tue Mar 19, 2019 4:57 pm

GreenGoo wrote:
Tue Mar 19, 2019 3:38 pm
That's good news, congratulations Jeff. I hope your mom-in-law likes it in the US.
We actually have little expectation she'll make little more than one more relatively short-term visit. It's my sister-in-law that we hope to bring here more long term; this is a necessary step.

My point though is that would be illegal to implement a "go slow on Mexicans only" policy - or that an attempt to decree such a policy would be met with a rapid smack-down in court. Immigration does take time - and in my wife's case it took 6 months for her permanent residency to be approved (and this was after we were married). And even then, there was two years of restrictions.

Processing people as refugees likely has some additional policy requirements that apply (and add to the time table). Imprisoning them in internment camps adds to the misery for sure and that is the point in process that needs to be eliminated (or at the very least overhauled into some sort of humane system).

User avatar
Zarathud
Posts: 13906
Joined: Fri Oct 15, 2004 10:29 pm
Location: Chicago, Illinois

Re: Immigration Policy

Post by Zarathud » Tue Mar 19, 2019 5:42 pm

LawBeefaroni wrote:Jeff is just an eternal optimist and he couldn't resist dropping some good news in such a gloomy-gus of a thread.
I needed that laugh, thanks.
"If the facts don't fit the theory, change the facts." - Albert Einstein
"When the president does it, that means that it is not illegal. - Nixon
"I don't stand by anything." - Trump
“Bad men need nothing more to compass their ends, than that good men should look on and do nothing.” - John Stuart Mill, Inaugural Address Delivered to the University of St Andrews, 2/1/1867

User avatar
Isgrimnur
Posts: 62780
Joined: Sun Oct 15, 2006 12:29 am
Location: Chookity pok
Contact:
Isgrimnur’s avatar
Snooze

Re: Immigration Policy

Post by Isgrimnur » Thu Mar 21, 2019 5:51 pm

Business Insider
President Donald Trump's decision to send troops to the southern border and funding transfers following the declaration of a national emergency pose an "unacceptable risk to Marine Corps combat readiness and solvency," the Marine Corps commandant warned this week.

An internal memo sent this week by Marine Corps Gen. Robert Neller to Secretary of the Navy Richard Spencer and Acting Secretary of Defense Patrick Shanahan listed "unplanned/unbudgeted southwest border operations" and "border security funding transfers" alongside Hurricanes Florence and Michael as "negative factors" putting readiness at risk, the Los Angeles Times first reported.

The four-star general explained that due to a number of unexpected costs, referred to as "negative impacts," the Marines will be forced to cancel or limit their participation in a number of previously planned activities, including training exercises in at least five countries.

He warned that the cancelled training exercises will "degrade the combat readiness and effectiveness of the Marine Corps," adding that "Marines rely on the hard, realistic training provided by these events to develop the individual and collective skills necessary to prepare for high-end combat."
...
Border security is listed among several factors, such as new housing allowances and civilian pay raises, that could trigger a budget shortfall for the Marine Corps, but it is noteworthy that the commandant identified a presidential priority as a detriment to the service.

In a separate memo, Neller explained that the Marines are currently short $1.3 billion for hurricane recovery operations.

"The hurricane season is only three months away, and we have Marines, Sailors, and civilians working in compromised structures," he wrote.

User avatar
Isgrimnur
Posts: 62780
Joined: Sun Oct 15, 2006 12:29 am
Location: Chookity pok
Contact:
Isgrimnur’s avatar
Snooze

Re: Immigration Policy

Post by Isgrimnur » Fri Mar 22, 2019 12:57 pm

WaPo
Pentagon plans to take money away from military construction projects to pay for President Trump’s border wall would potentially deal an outsize blow to Puerto Rico and particularly affect a program helping European allies deter Russia, according to a Washington Post analysis.

Under pressure from lawmakers, the Defense Department released a list Monday detailing $12.9 billion in military construction projects that had received money from Congress but had yet to be contracted. That status puts them in a pool of funding that Trump could take for the wall using emergency powers.

The Pentagon hasn’t said which specific projects would be defunded. But it has ruled out taking money from military housing projects or contracts due to award before the end of the fiscal year. When those are stripped out, the refined list decreases to $4.35 billion worth of projects that are actually vulnerable. The Trump administration plans to take up to $3.6 billion, or 83 percent, for the wall, meaning most of the projects on the shorter list could be defunded.

Puerto Rico is the most affected U.S. territory or state, with 10 projects at a value of $403 million on the smaller list, according to The Post’s analysis.

The projects in Puerto Rico that would potentially have their funding taken away include the construction of a school for military children on what was once Ramey Air Force Base and improvements to Camp Santiago, a training facility operated by the Puerto Rico National Guard.

Also on the most-vulnerable list is some $745 million worth of projects for the European Deterrence Initiative and its predecessor program. President Barack Obama launched the program in 2014 to shore up the defenses of European allies after Russia annexed Crimea from Ukraine.

Jeff V
Posts: 31964
Joined: Fri Oct 15, 2004 7:17 pm
Location: Nowhere you want to be.

Re: Immigration Policy

Post by Jeff V » Fri Mar 22, 2019 1:48 pm

You know, I bet Puerto Rico can make some of that money back by building ferry boats to bring refugees from Haiti and Cuba to Florida...charge a small head tax on each one and $$$ Profit!

User avatar
Isgrimnur
Posts: 62780
Joined: Sun Oct 15, 2006 12:29 am
Location: Chookity pok
Contact:
Isgrimnur’s avatar
Snooze

Re: Immigration Policy

Post by Isgrimnur » Tue Mar 26, 2019 10:46 am

NPR
The Pentagon won't allow its plan to spend $1 billion in to build a 57-mile fence at the southern U.S. border to interfere with military readiness, Acting Defense Secretary Patrick M. Shanahan told members of Congress Tuesday, seeking to ease concerns about the controversial shift of appropriated funding made possible by President Trump's declaration of a national emergency.

The Department of Defense is shifting the money from a military personnel account — funds that it says were freed up after some service branches fell short of their recruiting goals.
...
But in response, Committee Chairman Adam Smith, D-Wash., said the move would likely compel Congress to strip the Pentagon of the authority to "reprogram" funds that have been appropriated for specific purposes and programs. That authority is currently provided only in cases where the Pentagon consults with Congress before acting. But in this case, Smith noted, the Defense Department did not ask permission.

"Given a legal order from the commander in chief, we are executing on that order," Shanahan replied. He added that the Pentagon knew there were "downsides, which will hamper us" — including likely losing what he called the privilege of reprogramming funds.

"I appreciate the inherent intra-government complexities of the southwest border situation" Shanahan said in his opening statement. "I also want to emphasize: The funds requested for the border barrier amount to less than one percent of the National Defense topline."

User avatar
Smoove_B
Posts: 40404
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 12:58 am
Location: Kaer Morhen

Re: Immigration Policy

Post by Smoove_B » Thu Mar 28, 2019 9:17 am


Here's the President of the United States saying he isn't going to shoot undocumented immigrants but shooting undocumented immigrants would be very effective

User avatar
Skinypupy
Posts: 13799
Joined: Tue Dec 07, 2004 10:12 am
Location: Pac-12 Country

Re: Immigration Policy

Post by Skinypupy » Thu Mar 28, 2019 10:46 am

Smoove_B wrote:
Thu Mar 28, 2019 9:17 am

Here's the President of the United States saying he isn't going to shoot undocumented immigrants but shooting undocumented immigrants would be very effective
Came to post that.

Fucked up doesn't begin to cover it.
“Don’t tickle the wall clown.” - MST3K

User avatar
Isgrimnur
Posts: 62780
Joined: Sun Oct 15, 2006 12:29 am
Location: Chookity pok
Contact:
Isgrimnur’s avatar
Snooze

Re: Immigration Policy

Post by Isgrimnur » Fri Mar 29, 2019 5:47 pm

WaPo
President Trump said Friday that next week he would close the southern border, or at least large sections of it, if Mexico does not halt illegal immigration into the United States, repeating a threat he has made before but never with a specific timetable.

In a series of tweets and later during appearances before reporters, Trump did not spell out exactly what a border closing would entail but said it could involve halting “all trade” between the two countries — a prospect that would have profound ramifications for the U.S. economy.

Trump blamed Mexico for a growing flow of “illegals” entering the United States and cited two large migrant caravans making their way toward the U.S. border.

“If they don’t stop them, we’re closing the border,” Trump said at an event in Florida. “We’ll close it. And we’ll keep it closed for a long time. I’m not playing games. Mexico has to stop it.”

In another afternoon appearance, he said, “there’s a very good likelihood” that he’ll close the border next week.

User avatar
Jaymann
Posts: 9264
Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2004 7:13 pm
Location: California

Re: Immigration Policy

Post by Jaymann » Fri Mar 29, 2019 5:55 pm

Uh, don't illegal immigrants avoid the official border crossings...
Jaymann
]==(:::::::::::::>

User avatar
Isgrimnur
Posts: 62780
Joined: Sun Oct 15, 2006 12:29 am
Location: Chookity pok
Contact:
Isgrimnur’s avatar
Snooze

Re: Immigration Policy

Post by Isgrimnur » Fri Mar 29, 2019 5:58 pm

All the hubbub is the caravans presenting themselves at the border for asylum requests.

WaPo
The nation’s top border official warned that the U.S. immigration enforcement system along the nation’s southern boundary is at “the breaking point” and said Wednesday that authorities are having to release migrants into the country after cursory background checks because of a crush of asylum-seeking families with children.

Kevin McAleenan, the commissioner of U.S. Customs and Border Protection, said that for the first time in more than a decade, his agency is “reluctantly” performing direct releases of migrants, meaning they are not turned over to Immigration and Customs Enforcement, they are not detained, they are not given ankle bracelets to track their movements and they are allowed to leave with just a notice to appear in court at a later date.

He said that this is a “negative outcome” but that it is “the only current option we have” because of overcrowding at detention facilities as Central Americans stream to the border knowing they will be able to gain entry with asylum claims.

User avatar
Holman
Posts: 21777
Joined: Sun Oct 24, 2004 8:00 pm
Location: Approximately Wissahickon

Re: Immigration Policy

Post by Holman » Sat Mar 30, 2019 5:28 pm


#BREAKING: Trump cuts off foreign aid to El Salvador, Guatemala and Honduras http://hill.cm/vRFkCcU
That'll show those asylum seekers who's boss!
Much prefer my Nazis Nuremberged.

User avatar
GreenGoo
Posts: 40570
Joined: Thu Oct 14, 2004 10:46 pm
Location: Ottawa, ON

Re: Immigration Policy

Post by GreenGoo » Sat Mar 30, 2019 5:49 pm

Hilarious.

Post Reply